 |
Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde Double Feature (1932/1941) by Friz Freleng, Rouben Mamoulian, Victor Fleming
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
DVD detailsActor: Fredric March, Ingrid Bergman, Mel Blanc, Miriam Hopkins, Spencer Tracy Director: Friz Freleng, Rouben Mamoulian, Victor Fleming Brand: Warner Brothers Writer: John Lee Mahin Writer: Percy Heath Writer: Robert Louis Stevenson Writer: Samuel Hoffenstein Writer: Warren Foster DVD: Region Code 1 Audio: English (Original Language), Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono; English (Subtitled); Spanish (Subtitled); French (Subtitled) Format: Color, DVD-Video, NTSC, Subtitled Picture Format: 1.33:1 Running Time: 209 minutes DVD Release Date: 2004-01-06 Audience Rating: Unrated Studio: Warner Home Video
DVD Reviews of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde Double Feature (1932/1941)DVD Review: A classic that has been remade again and again Summary: 4 StarsLike Frankenstein's monster this has become a classic of early sci fi horror films. The early time lapse special effects of the transformation in the Spencer Tracy character makes the film historically important in technical terms as well. The acting is first rate and the plot although not exactly the Novel is closer than a lot of others since.
The idea that chemical imbalances in the brain govern
behavior has been part of drug treatment for different types of dementia
since even before this was written in the 19th century.
We have seen that drugs are not an answer in the 20th century.
DVD Review: AWFUL..BORING..DID NOT KEEP ME INTRESTED AT ALL!!! Summary: 2 StarsI THOUGHT IT STINKED! I ACCIDENTIALLY GOT THIS VERSION INSTEAD OF THE ONE WITH SPENCER TRACY AND LANA..INGRID, AS I PREFERRED IT MORE THAN THIS ONE..I CANT EVEN DESCIBE IT BUT THIS ONE IS A FLOP! SORRY FRREDRIC!
DVD Review: Ingrid & Lana Make The `41 Film Easy On The Eyes While March Excels In The Earlier 'Talkie' Summary: 3 StarsThe best part of the 1941 film is ogling the two female leads. Ingrid Bergman, who uncharacteristically (in the movies) plays a tramp, is gorgeous, and Lana Turner, who ain't bad. You get those two and Spencer Tracy, who's almost always interesting, and you have three good leads.
What's lacking are the special-effects which are needed in a horror story like this. With modern special-effects, better sounds and cameras, it would have made this - and other horror films - scarier.
Still, they did a decent job here in regard to Dr. Jekyll's transformation into Hyde, but the movie needs more suspense and horror, and a tighter script if it's going to be about two hours long.
Still, there's Bergman and Turner, both in their prime, looking about as good as they appeared and that's almost enough for me to continue watching this a few more times.
As for the 1931 version, this was a decent early effort (first "talkie" movie presentation) at the famous Robert Louis Stevenson story, this time with Frederic March in the lead role, which he plays well.
The romance parts with March and Rose Hobardt are somewhat corny. The ending features a tremendous action scene with a very nimble "Hyde."
It was interesting to hear Jekyll's name pronounced Gee-kle, with the long "e." I've never heard it pronounced that way before or since.
I thought March was better than Spency Tracy in the 1940s film but you couldn't beat the women (Ingrid Bergman and Lana Turner) in the latter version. The ladies here were okay but no match for Bergman and Turner. The same can be said for the film as a whole. It was worth seeing, but not worth owning.
DVD Review: Great make up Summary: 5 StarsThis movie is one hour and thirty-eight minutes long and was released on December 31, 1931. Fredric March did the all time best Jekyll and Hyde. During the middle of the film we see the transformation of good well meaning Dr. Jekyll into the evil Mr. Hyde. Plus you have a sub-plot of the good doctor being engange to Muriel Carew and then towards the end of the movie when he is forced to release her because he cannot controll his transformation. In the end Mr. Hyde is kill and we witness the final transformation into Dr. Jekyll and his soul is finally at rest. This is a great film to own and watch.
DVD Review: Enjoy! Summary: 4 StarsJust as in "Les Miserables", Frederic March really was this young once. The avuncular actor of later films won't be found. Here March portrays the split personality of both a kindly, idealistic London physician and the raging maniac he creates in his lab. Dr. J was filmed in creepy black and white-that lost art. The special effects are truly shivery as the good Jekyll transforms into the evil Hyde before the viewer's very eyes. Director Mamoulian keeps the pace frantic as March morphs from Jekyll to Hyde and back. The female leads are central to the plot. Both Miriam Hopkins and Rose Hobart are superb. MH is the racy, "pre Code" bar girl who Jekyll befriends and Hyde abuses. An old "Variety" review claimed that Hopkins played her role with "a capital sense of comedy and coquetry". She certainly had personality. RH is Hyde's proper upper class good girl. Her dad, played by Halliwell Hobbes, notably smells a rat with Jekyll early on. (According to the "Video Hound's Golden Movie Retriever" Ms. Hobart lived to the age of 92, dying in 2000). Hollywood, in the very early days of Academy Awards, noticed Dr. J. March won the Best Actor statuette but had to share it with Wallace Beery, ex post facto style. DR. J was put forth for Best Adapted Screenplay. If Makeup awards were given back then, there surely would have been another nomination. If Dr. J has any weak spots it lies in the decrease of dread each time March changes personalities. Also, Mamoulian may have had trouble with the coda. The film could have ended sooner. This reviewer made the same observation about "The Mark of Zorro" but these rants are minor. Dr. J represents classic early Hollywood, plain and simple. There appear to be several restored DVD and restored VHS versions out there for viewers to enjoy.
Description of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde Double Feature (1932/1941)Studio: Warner Home Video Release Date: 09/13/2005 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) Fredric March won an Oscar? for playing the protagonist (and antagonist) of Robert Louis Stevenson's story. Dr. Henry Jekyll is an honorable man of science, albeit frustrated at the enforced celibacy of a delayed wedding date. Hyde is the fearsome creature he turns into after drinking a potion, and Hyde's appetites (mostly expressed with Miriam Hopkins's Cockney dance-hall wench) are decidedly unrestrained. March's performance is pretty theatrical, but it's fun to watch; his Hyde twitches and squawks and lopes around like an ape in a tuxedo. Rouben Mamoulian's direction has plenty of the brio of early-thirties Hollywood, and the transformations from Jekyll to Hyde are ingenious for the time. This film followed Dracula and Frankenstein into theaters by a few months, and it stands well with those horror classics--and it's a darn sight more fun (and much more down and dirty) than the 1941 MGM version of Stevenson's tale. --Robert Horton Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1941) Classy MGM was not the studio most likely to make a horror movie in 1941, and in fact its production of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde ended up looking more like a glossy costume drama than a B-movie frightfest. The mood of Robert Louis Stevenson's tale of a divided doctor is ably captured in Joseph Ruttenberg's Oscar-nominated cinematography--more so, perhaps, than in Spencer Tracy's lead performance. Tracy wasn't especially happy about playing the role, although his transformations from good Dr. Jekyll to evil Dr. Hyde are convincing enough. One of the main reasons to see this version of the story is the young, impossibly beautiful Ingrid Bergman, then still a year shy of Casablanca. Bergman was cast in the good-girl part, but proved a shrewd judge of material, even this early in her Hollywood career; she finagled her way into playing the floozy instead, thus securing a more colorful acting platform than Lana Turner, who ended up in the more respectable role. Director Victor Fleming's previous movie was a little number called Gone with the Wind, and the Big Picture approach to that project may have influenced his work here--this Dr. Jekyll is just a bit too stately, too polished to really engage. The picture is so dignified it never cuts loose with the kind of wild invention that marked the 1932 version of the story, which won Fredric March an Oscar. It's the tale as imagined by Jekyll, rather than Hyde. --Robert Horton
|
 |